1567 DOES VIRTUAL PERFORMANCE CORRELATE WITH CLINICAL SKILLS IN ROBOTICS? INVESTIGATING CONCURRENT VALIDITY OF DA VINCI SIMULATION WITH CLINICAL PERFORMANCE

摘要

You have accessJournal of UrologyTechnology & Instruments: Surgical Education & Skills Assessment (II)1 Apr 20131567 DOES VIRTUAL PERFORMANCE CORRELATE WITH CLINICAL SKILLS IN ROBOTICS? INVESTIGATING CONCURRENT VALIDITY OF DA VINCI SIMULATION WITH CLINICAL PERFORMANCE Sumeet Syan, Patrick Ramos, Inderbir S. Gill, Monish Aron, and Andrew J. Hung Sumeet SyanSumeet Syan Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author , Patrick RamosPatrick Ramos Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author , Inderbir S. GillInderbir S. Gill Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author , Monish AronMonish Aron Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author , and Andrew J. HungAndrew J. Hung Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.02.3097AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES While face, content and construct validity has been shown for the da Vinci Skills Simulator (SIM), its relationship to actual clinical performance has not been studied. Herein we investigate the correlation between robotic simulation and clinical performance during robotic prostatectomy (RP) (concurrent validity). METHODS Nine robotic trainees were enrolled. Pre-study questionnaire documented self-report of prior robotic experience. Baseline performance comprised 6 virtual reality exercises on SIM followed by robotic performance of a segment (bladder drop/endopelvic fascia) of RP which was video-recorded and scored by a blinded expert robotic surgeon using the validated six-metric Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS). Spearman's analysis was used to correlate baseline simulator and clinical performance. RESULTS Nine participants were PGY8 (n=1), PGY-7 (n=3), PGY-6 (=2), PGY-5 (n=2) and PGY-4 (n=1). Of these, 7 (78%) had prior simulator training. Median RP performed was 40 cases (range 20-200). Both simulator and GEARS metrics were internally consistent (Crohnbach's α=0.8). While several individual SIM metrics correlated to GEARS metrics (r=0.7-0.8, p<0.03), overall, SIM metrics did not predict total GEARS scores (p>0.05). For example, only SIM scores for controller clutching efficiency (workspace range) correlated with time required to drop bladder (r=0.7, p=0.03); otherwise it did not correlate with other clinical parameters. GEARS clinical scores, however, significantly correlated with prior clinical experience: number of bladders dropped (r=0.7, p=0.03), pedicles taken (r=0.7, p=0.02) and total number of RP performed (r=0.7, p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS This study is the first to evaluate correlation between robotic SIM and clinical performance; in our training cohort no statistically significant overall correlation was seen. Given that most participants had prior simulator training, this may suggest that simulation in its present form predicts only basic robotic skills thereby emphasizing the ongoing need for more complex training simulation. GEARS scoring on baseline clinical skills correlated with prior robotic experience for both basic and advanced steps of RP, thus supporting its relevance in clinical assessment. © 2013 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 189Issue 4SApril 2013Page: e643 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2013 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Sumeet Syan Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author Patrick Ramos Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author Inderbir S. Gill Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author Monish Aron Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author Andrew J. Hung Los Angeles, CA More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...